Natalie Bennett2015-08-02T20:29:37-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=natalie-bennettCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Natalie BennettGood old fashioned elbow grease.A Healthy Society Needs Strong Trade Unionstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.78331342015-07-20T19:00:00-04:002015-07-20T12:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
These plans are dreadful, and must be fought tooth and nail, which the Green Party will be doing. And so will many others, I believe, with a swell of support already evident around the country. The strong support for TUC leader Frances O'Grady from the BBC Any Questions audience on Friday (17 July) night was encouraging.

But in raising this debate, the government is also opening up an opportunity - a chance for a debate about what unions are for, how important they are to economic stability and to an effective, productive economy and safe workplaces - a chance in short to argue for the reverse proposal, to call for the strengthening of the power and influence of unions, for the benefit of our economy, society and environment.

This debate is also a chance to tackle lazy stereotypes about unions so often promulgated by the right-wing media about "extremism", and "greed". The sort of stereotypes that the government wants to perpetuate, yet don't reflect the experiences of communities around Britain.

And it is a chance to highlight - as the Blacklist Support Group campaign has been doing - how even legal union activities and essential whistleblowing has not been protected by the state but instead been illegally repressed and spied upon by the authorities, a misuse of power reflected in the behaviour of undercover police operating against the environmental movement.

The debate comes at a time when we are seeing a resurgence in union activity, a growth in new areas - and when - perhaps most usefully of all in campaigning terms - Chancellor George Osborne has left some real chinks in his armour in his portrayal of the state of our low wage economy.

For even the Chancellor has identified low wages as a problem, and is calling for businesses to pay their workers more - £9 an hour by 2020. (The Green Party in the recent election was calling for £10 by 2020, and that had a lot of Tories I was debating with spluttering.) Osborne's acknowledged that the minimum wage should be a living wage, that workers should be paid enough money to live on, even if what he's proposing isn't really a living wage.

He's saying this at a time when organisations as apparently unlikely as the IMF and the World Bank are acknowledging that economic inequality, the rising wealth of the 1% while the rest of us get poorer, is a threat to future economic stability.

Yet it's those industries where unions have maintained their strength, and held together against the odds, that wages have best been maintained. Conversely, it's in industries where unions have been weak and membership low - the retailing sector leaps to mind - where wages have remained at or very barely above the minimum wage. If Osborne wants to see wages rise and be maintained, he needs strong unions.

And the Chancellor is calling for a big rise in the productivity of our economy, up towards German levels - in the very economy where unions have far more legal powers and rights, where their partnership with management is seen as essential in the levels of productivity that have proved so elusive in Britain.

Further, the government proposals come at a time when the need for health and safety in the workplace - the maintenance of which is an important role that unions can play when corner-cutting management fails to live up to its responsibilities - is being dreadfully demonstrated.

There have been far too many horrific workplace incidents recently: in the last few days two factory explosions left six dead, the horrific death of a Crossrail construction worker under tonnes of concrete, the tragic death of an inexperienced young worker on the Crick Institute beside St Pancras station.

That calls into question the government's slashing of health and safety provision, but strong unions could help to stand up for worker protection. No worker should die as a result of safety lapses anywhere, but particularly here in Britain, an advanced, wealthy economy that has the capacity to ensure safety. As the Hazards at Work campaign says, "Better red tape than red bandages".

It's clear that a healthy society, an economically stable and balanced society, needs strong unions. This government has given us a chance to put that case, and it is time to do it loudly and clearly.]]>Budget 2015 Does Not Deliver a Caring Britaintag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.77534302015-07-08T11:00:52-04:002015-07-08T11:59:02-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
He did deliver a surprise announcement about making the minimum wage a living wage - in theory at least. For the Green Party this was encouraging, to see the Tory Party "stealing" a policy we've been advocating for more than a decade. Although when we came to the detail - not for the under 25s, not until next year, just £7.20 when the current living wage is £7.85 - it became clear that this isn't a living wage. But still a principle has been laid out that can now be fought for with renewed vigour.

But beyond this step in the right direction, this was a Budget that failed Britain. In his short-sighted tax cuts for polluting vehicles, Osborne thinks he is cutting families' transport costs. Yet he failed to pledge any investment in our creaking public transport network, in spite of the growing demand for train services and the falling number of young people learning to drive. We must build a transport system fit for the future, which reduces pollution and helps tackle climate change while providing a convenient and affordable way of getting around for all.

Such policies are endemic in a government that merrily sacrifices the poor in an economically illiterate attempt to "get the economy going" or "bring down the deficit". I'd like to see George Osborne explain to the faces of the people whose lives he has just made more difficult why it is worth it for his "long-term economic plan".

He should face the students who contemplate an ever greater weight of debt if they choose to access higher education.

He should face the children who will be pushed into poverty simply because they have more than one sibling.

He should face the tenants being forced to endure the crippling rents of the private sector and the young people who can see only homelessness in their future.

But instead the government is changing the way child poverty is measured and scrapping their requirement to reduce it, guaranteeing that it won't have to face up to the impact of its cruel policies.

If the government is serious about "making work pay" and helping "hardworking people", today was its opportunity to take a different direction.

The Green Party is proud of Britain's welfare state, and we want to see it become a strong safety net for those who need it.

With policies to make the minimum wage a genuine living wage for workers of all ages, to scrap student loans and reintroduce maintenance grants, restore the link between benefits and prices, build more council homes and introduce rent controls for private tenants, we would create a caring Britain. And we would be able to face the most disadvantaged people in society and give them the hope and security they need.

Today George Osborne squandered a huge opportunity. He could have learned the lessons that led to the economic crisis, started to build a fair and sustainable economy and given Britain the tools it needs to help in the fight against climate change.

Instead his backwards priorities led him to sacrifice the poor and the planet in the name of a "long-term economic plan" that is failing to secure our future.

Natalie Bennett is the leader of the Green Party]]>Lancashire's Vote Against Fracking Proves We Can Win the Fight for Action on Climate Changetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.76940582015-06-29T19:00:00-04:002015-06-30T04:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
My congratulations go out to the many people who put their lives on hold to campaign against this extreme form of energy extraction going ahead on their doorstep, and to the councillors who bravely defied enormous pressures and made the best decision for their local community.

This was the first of what I am sure will be dozens of victories against the short-sighted and cruel policies of the Conservative government.

It proves to the growing network of activists campaigning against everything from spending cuts for public services to attacks on our civil liberties that the majority of the electorate, who did not vote for this government, can stand up against it.

Support for fracking is a major policy for David Cameron. As part of his backing for the rights of corporations over those of people, he is hatching plans to "fast-track" it.

But Lancashire County Council's decision sets an important precedent for councillors around the country. If Cameron wants to see Britain fracked, he will have to persuade local councils to defy the interests of their voters.

Shares in fracking companies plummeted after yesterday's decision - the industry got nervous. If more councils follow Lancashire's example, they might just decide that the hassle of applying for planning permission isn't worth it.

But this was just the beginning. Already Cuadrilla is considering appealing the council's decision, and Cameron's "fast-track" plans are designed to reduce the obstacles to attaining permission for initial drilling.

And that is what we're up against. With every battle we win against the Tories, they will shift the goalposts to make it easier for them to win next time.

This doesn't mean defeating austerity and climate complacency is impossible, but it does prove we cannot rest on our laurels.

In the case of fracking, this rejection is worth celebrating, but we must not stop campaigning until there is a complete ban on the practice in Britain. Only then can we turn a corner in terms of our energy mix, to focus it on renewables.

What we know now is that the fight for climate action can be won. If we take this positive outlook, we can defeat airport expansion, reinstate support for wind power and end the ties between our government and the fossil fuel industry.

As we move towards December's vital international climate talks, small victories like this give us hope that sustainable futures can be secured around the world.]]>The Disabled Will Pay for Cameron's Cutstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.76528042015-06-24T08:01:48-04:002015-06-24T09:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
On this, David Cameron has history.

For the last five years he has been Prime Minister of a government that has consistently attacked the disabled.

From the bedroom tax to Universal Credit, disabled people are being made to pay for the fraud and greed of the bankers.

On 30 June the Independent Living Fund will be abolished, pulling the rug from under the 18,000 people with particularly high needs who rely on it to remain in their own homes.

This cruel cut will not only make it even more difficult for disabled people to participate in their communities and go to work, but could even force some into residential homes.

Today the Green Party's Work and Pensions spokesperson Jonathan Bartley joins Disabled People Against Cuts to lobby parliament in a last-ditch attempt to save this vital fund. Perhaps meeting those who depend on this support face to face might persuade MPs to change their minds.

But this is just one telling example of the government's attitude towards disabled people.

On Monday we heard the story of Nick Gaskin from Leicestershire. Nick has primary progressive multiple sclerosis and cannot walk, talk or feed himself, yet he was sent a letter ordering him to attend an interview at a job centre. If he didn't attend the meeting, where he would be expected to discuss the possibility of going into paid work or training, he would lose his benefits.

The dignity of people like Nick - and the stress levels of their carers and families - should not be at the mercy of any government's ideology. Disabled people should be able to rely on a level of respect and compassion that prevents politicians from even contemplating taking away the funding that allows them to live fulfilling lives.

We should be giving them the benefits they need gladly, not grudgingly, as befits a humane, caring society.

The fact is that our society and its structures, such as public transport and access to facilities, fail to adequately meet the needs of disabled people. The support they receive from the government is a part recompense for this.

Only by investing in fulfilling the basic needs of disabled people, and in helping them to overcome the challenges they face every day, can we show that we value and acknowledge the contribution disabled people have to make.

The Green Party wants to build a society that works for the common good, where inequality is minimal and everyone has the opportunity to participate in their communities. We believe that in the world's sixth-richest country, no one should live in poverty.

Rather than cutting welfare, this government should be investing in areas like public transport and home insulation to make life easier for the disabled, create jobs and move our economy towards a more sustainable path.

The so-called "need" to implement huge spending cuts is nothing more than rhetoric. We must demand that our government puts the health and wellbeing of the people they represent first.]]>Saturday's Demonstration Is Only the Beginning - Together, We Can Defeat Austeritytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.76106262015-06-18T19:00:00-04:002015-06-18T17:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
Yet little more than a month later, Iraq was invaded. The protesters' views were cast aside. And with them went many people's faith in our systems of democracy and in the people's ability to influence those in power. Over 12 years later, for some, their hope still hasn't been recovered.

And yet this Saturday I will join more than 50,000 optimists in taking to the streets of London once more - this time to stand united against austerity. I will join hundreds of Green Party activists from up and down the UK in the Green Bloc, making our call for investment to create a fair and sustainable economy heard.

I know that one march won't convince George Osborne to instantly change track. But it's the cumulative effect of all our marches, demos, and protests that is so powerful - each sending out the message that an alternative future is possible and that there is mass support ready to deliver it.

Battles for change have never been won overnight - but they have been won. Women won the right to vote. Slavery was brought to an end. Rights that were once thought beyond our reach have been delivered. The Westminster vote against bombing Syria in 2013 was in part a delayed response, a taking on board, of the Iraq marches.

Together we can and will deliver change.

Saturday is a major step along that path. It's not often that 50,000 likeminded people from across the country come together, all prepared to take action to save what is left of our public services. We must use this march to make new friends, to share our ideas, to remind each other that we are not alone.

It is vital that we see this demonstration as just the beginning. In 2003 people thought one amazing day of demonstrations was enough to make a change. The lesson we must learn is that continuing pressure, continuing determination, is key.

We won't be going home on Saturday thinking our work is done. The next step is to use our energy and come together with our new friends to plan more marches, more petitions, new ways of making life difficult for those who plan to cut services we rely on and take us in the wrong direction on environmental policy.

We've already seen the beginnings of this since the election - an upsurge of activism that I've seen on anti-austerity marches from Swansea to Sheffield that have brought together campaigners on issues ranging from excessive testing of children in schools and opposition to fracking, to the fight to protect the NHS against privatisation.

We must leave the march on Saturday and spread the word. If everyone who attends can persuade just one more person that the government's programme of spending cuts is unnecessary and unfair, we can begin to build a real movement.

Already, we can say that the vast majority of people in this country did not vote for the Conservatives' vision of a state with no safety net for those who fall on hard times that talks about dealing with climate change and protecting the natural world while actually doing the opposite.

But our efforts will have really paid off if the next general election centres not on how much government spending should be cut, but on whether or not it should be cut at all, and how we should be investing in an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable future.

Only then, when we have successfully cracked public debate open to considering alternatives can we remove the likes of Cameron and Osborne from power. With time, and through collective action, we can end austerity and take positive steps towards investing in our communities.]]>Upsurge of Activism Shows There Is a Real Alternativetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.75704602015-06-15T11:35:35-04:002015-06-15T03:59:02-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
It seems clear to me that from fiscal to environmental to social policy, Britain is speeding down a dead-end road, with a brick wall fast approaching.

George Osborne is steaming ahead with his plans to lock in the "rule" that the government must run fiscal surpluses in "normal times". And the Labour "opposition"? The loyal Polly Toynbee is reduced to hoping that the leadership contenders will come out against the bill.

Osborne's approach is based on the notion that our current level of government debt was caused by over-spending by the Blair-Brown governments. That flies entirely in the face of the evidence.

And the "rule" flies in the face of the advice of the IMF - not known as a champion of higher levels of debt - which has said in an official paper approved by its chief economist that the costs of paying down Britain's debt would outweigh the benefits.

And it leaves Britain stuck in what Nobel-prizewinning economist Paul Krugman has called the austerian delusion, long abandoned by most of the rest of the world.

The evidence is that this simply doesn't add up. The Office for Budget Responsibility has pointed out the impact of our ageing population - saying that the new fiscal "rule" will be entirely untenable as early as 2023.

Then there's environmental policy. To start with the international scene, we're seeing movement in the rhetoric in dealing with climate change as the Paris climate talks approach.

Many countries, from China to Germany, are changing their direction of travel on emissions, and proving along the way that this is not just possible, but hugely rewarding - encouraging technological advance and business and community development, as well as maintaining a liveable planet.

And in Britain? Well we've got a government that is for ideological or political reasons set against the cheapest form of renewable energy, onshore wind, appears to be planning to abandon altogether the no-brainer of energy conservation, and which is stuck on the fantasy of fracking.

Finally, there's the state of society, where the strains are obvious. Child poverty is set to soar, with all the lifelong impacts on education, health and opportunities that brings. Low paid workers can't keep the lights on. Benefit recipients - particularly the disabled and the ill - are being hit by a vicious sanctions regime that's sending them flooding to the food banks.

So where does that leave us, when the Tories returned to power only a few scant weeks ago, apparently for a five-year term?

Despair might be tempting - and I've met people who are almost overwhelmed by that emotion.

But what's becoming stronger and more evident by the day is determination - determination to act, to protest, to stand up and be counted, to campaign for a genuine change in direction.

Whether it's the bicycle couriers in London organising against all of the odds for a living wage, the people of Sheffield out on the streets in huge numbers in an anti-austerity march just days after the election, or a simple petition removing anti-homeless spikes within hours, the election result has produced an upsurge of activism at all levels, on a huge range of topics. Tomorrow, I'll be seeing it in action as I join protesters on the streets of Swansea.

These are challenging circumstances, times when it's not easy to see the way forward.

The ruling ideology of the past few decades - call it neo-Thatcherism, call it neo-liberalism, call it what you like - has clearly failed even in its own terms. The age of fossil fuels is coming to an end, fast.

But there is hope. Strong grass roots movements are proving there is a real alternative to our disaster-directed course.]]>The Government's Crackdown on Illegal Immigration Will Benefit Nobodytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.74217462015-05-22T19:00:00-04:002015-05-22T12:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
These plans do nothing but illustrate the government's lack of compassion, lack of perspective and ultimately their lack of will to genuinely address the economic anxieties of the people of Britain.

The measures Cameron has announced will criminalise those working here illegally, allow their wages to be seized, and expand the scope of the 'deport first, appeal later' system. They are designed to appease the government's critics as the ONS revealed that net migration has risen to 380,000 - another clear failure of the government to meet its own arbitrary target. The new policy announcement, however, is at best totally illogical: the figures announced yesterday are for legal immigration, and will not be affected in the slightest by tightening laws on illegal immigration.

At worst, however, this is the most dangerous kind of scapegoating; linking overall immigration figures in both the media and the public consciousness with illegality reinforces the already pervasive idea that all immigrants are somehow illegitimate, needing constant supervision and strict regulation.

These measures are also deeply worrying in that they represent a significant step-up in the government's willingness to force those who are 'undeserving' into poverty. Thus far, they have been content to steadily withdraw benefits, refusing to help many of those who need it on the grounds that that help has not been earned. Now, however, they are going further: confiscating earnings on the grounds that they should not have been earned in the first place. These policies are the product of a party more concerned with appeasing anti-immigrant sentiment than on ensuring the well-being of the people it governs.

In the end, this policy will benefit nobody. Not those who are trapped, often through no fault of their own or through life events that might happen to any of us, in irregular immigration status; not those who are here legally and find themselves increasingly branded as a problem; and not the British-born workers whose wages are being depressed not by migration but by the failure of big businesses to pay their staff a living wage - and the failure of the government to make them.

This is a victory only for ignorance - a victory of rhetoric over logic, of posturing over compassion. It is a victory for those who seek to demonise immigrants, who seek to pull up Britain's drawbridge and banish diversity from our society.

If we are to really address people's concerns about immigration, we need to do two things. First, recognise and communicate that pressures on schools, hospitals and other public services are not the result of immigration but of harsh government cuts; that wages are low not because of foreign-born workers but because our welfare system and low minimum wage subsidies companies, allowing them to pay inadequate wages; and that jobs are not 'stolen' by migrants but are lost when the government fails to invest in industries and public services. And second, we need to create an immigration policy that is fair and compassionate, that does not discriminate, and that allows people to feel invested in our society instead of alienated from it.]]>From Town Halls to Westminster, We Need Proportional Representationtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.73155682015-05-19T19:00:00-04:002015-05-19T15:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/two petitions with more than 350,000 signatures calling for reform of the electoral system that caused the most disproportional result from a Westminster election ever.

For the Green Party the maths is simple. Our more than 1.1million votes would, under a proportional system, have delivered 24 seats. Instead we got just one - the return of the brilliant MP for Brighton Pavilion, Caroline Lucas.

London would have three or four Green MPs - the number of Green Assembly members it could see next year, under the Additional Member System used for these proportional elections, which have never seen fewer than two Greens on the Assembly since its creation.

In a multiparty democracy first-past-the-post, a failed system for decades, is clearly comprehensively out of date.

Overall, in this election the Tories won just over one third of the vote, 37%, but more than half the seats. And that's without considering the fact that more than 30% of eligible people chose not to vote.

Our current government has the backing of less than a quarter of the electorate.

The problems with our political system go deeper than the electoral system, but certainly a significant number of those non-voters feel that, living in "safe seats", it's not worth their bother voting, and it is easy to understand their position.

Opponents of reform often claim that other systems are "too complex" for voters to understand, but Scottish, Welsh and London voters are managing perfectly well - and what could be simpler or clearer than a system where if you get 10% of the votes, you get 10% of the seats in parliament?

Vote for what you believe in, and get it: that's the system we need.

The focus yesterday, rightly, was on Westminster, where there's been no significant reform since women got the vote in 1918. It would be nice to make a national vow not to get to the centenary of that important event without real change.

But there's another issue, even more mathematically striking - local government elections. Their results from first-past-the-post can be even more divorced from the voters' wishes.

Take Bournemouth. Now I can only say congratulations to the local Green Party, which won its first-ever council seat (by a nerve-wrackingly narrow margin) after a recount.

But that one seat came from more than 25,000 votes, while elected Conservative councillors, an overwhelming majority, collected an average of fewer than 2,000 votes each.

That was in its way, however, a fairer result than last year in Hackney, where the Green Party won 20.5% of the vote, but no seats, while the Labour Party took 88% of seats from 58% of the vote.

And on Crewkerne (Somerset) town council, the Green Party's candidates won 31% of the votes, but no seats on the council. The Lib Dems hold 11 of the 12 seats.

By contrast, in Scotland, elections are held through the proportional Single Transferable Vote method - and deliver fair results.

Electoral reform can seem to be a rather technical subject, hardly a popular cause that is likely to get hundreds of thousands out on the streets, but it is clear that our current system is not working at Westminster nor local council level.

It's part of the reason why our politics is failing to deliver for the common good, with the largest parties focusing their attention and policies on swing voters in swing seats.

This is a campaign that needs to be high-profile, vocal, and led by civil society actors like the Electoral Reform Society and Unlock Democracy, with the backing of everyone who understands the need for real change in our failed political system.

It's not easy to see the exact route by which reform could be achieved - given we now have a majority Tory government in which a significant number of members enjoy the cushion of safe seats.

But it's a tiny majority of 12, likely to soon fall apart. The whole of Westminster is currently febrile and unstable - change must come, so it will come, and the more we keep up the pressure, the more likely it is to happen, and the more likely that it will produce a truly democratic outcome.

The failed AV referendum came not from popular pressure but a Westminster stitch-up; keeping up the pressure means we can get a far better choice next time.]]>The Green Party Are the Realists in This Electiontag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.71727442015-04-30T19:00:00-04:002015-06-30T05:59:02-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
But they have doubts, because what we are saying is very different to what the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour are saying. Those parties are saying that austerity is inevitable, that the rich can't be taxed, and that benefits can't be paid to those who need them. And they are saying, by their silence, that climate change can't be tackled.

The question was put to me very clearly by some student journalists in Liverpool at the weekend: "aren't you too idealistic? Are your policies realistic?".

My answer to them was simple: we are the realists.

It is the other parties who are stuck in a failed 20th Century politics that's delivered an economic situation, a social arrangement, and a treatment of the environment that clearly cannot continue. The approach of successive governments under Thatcher, Blair, Brown and Cameron - watching as the gap between rich and poor has grown, selling off our public services, and paying at most lip service to environmental protection, has clearly failed. And that explains the sense of frustration, anger and disillusionment so evident among voters today.

And yet the business-as-usual parties are carrying on as though the UK's fraud-ridden, overinflated and out-of-control banking sector wasn't a massive threat to the economy; as though having more than 20% of workers on less than the living wage were sustainable; as though we could continue to treat the planet as a mine and a dumping ground without disastrous consequences.

And despite all the evidence, they maintain that austerity is the way out.

This week Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman pointed out that continuing austerity, whether the "light" version offered by Labour or the "heavy" version of the Conservatives, does "major damage" - and that the UK seems "stuck on obsessions that have been mainly laughed out of the discourse elsewhere".

But we don't need to look to economists to see that our economy, as it is now, is not working.

The growth figures out this week show manufacturing and construction falling back, while the services sector, funded largely by soaring consumer debt, is holding up the overall figure - clear evidence that this government has failed in its aim to rebalance our economy away from the financial sector and bring manufacturing back to Britain.

We've got a housing policy that's working primarily for the gain of private landlords, particularly those owning large numbers of houses, who last year received £9.3billion in housing benefit, while also collecting more than £5billion in mortgage rate relief. That's while 1.8million households languish on waiting lists for social housing and, particularly in London, the concept of affordable housing has become a farce: you'll need a household income of £100,000 for an "affordable" four-bedroom flat in a major new development.

We've got small businesses facing the same tax rate as the multinationals, despite the fact that we know small businesses contribute far more to their communities and to society than the corporate giants. Under the last Labour and Tory governments, which reduced and then scrapped the difference in corporation tax paid by small and large businesses, small businesses have been paying a larger and larger share of corporation tax. Larger firms, meanwhile, often opt to avoid this tax altogether. They're relying on the rest of us to pay tax for the roads their delivery lorries need, the hospitals and schools their staff and customers need, and the benefits needed to supplement the low wages they pay their staff. These businesses - the real scroungers - siphon money out of the UK tax pot, and far too often into tax havens.

And then there's the state of our natural world. Whichever measure you look at, it is dire. Globally, we've lost 50% of the world's wild animals in the past 40 years. Locally, we've got air pollution levels that are killing up to 60,000 people a year and reducing the capacity of our children's lungs, a disability that will stay with them for the rest of their lives.

And climate change is a huge, pressing issue on which this government - which once dubbed itself the 'greenest ever' - has stalled action, while pursuing its fracking fantasy. Their failure to deliver on their environmental promise has denied small businesses and communities the chance to seize control of their energy supply from the "Big Six". It has left us trailing behind on renewables while much of the rest of the world powers ahead, and led to cold homes, costing the NHS £1.4billion a year and causing many thousands of excess winter deaths.

It is realistic to think we can have a different kind of economy and society. It is possible to create a fair and just arrangement in which no one need fear being unable to put food on the table or keep a roof over their head; in which businesses big and small pay their way to fund the infrastructure their profits depend on; in which we all collectively live within the environmental limits of our planet.

It is profoundly unrealistic to think we can continue as we are.]]>It's Time for the UK to Stand Up for Migrantstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.71088062015-04-21T19:00:00-04:002015-06-21T05:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
Instead of taking meaningful steps to address this crisis, this year the European Union has allocated far fewer vessels, person power and resources to preventing these deaths. Instead of recognising our duty to act, politicians from across the European Union, fearful of the electoral consequences of taking action to mitigate the problem, speak of the 'pull factor' of saving the lives of those drowning in the Mediterranean. Yesterday's proposals from the EU, which include a possible military operation to destroy boats used by people smugglers, and attempts to 'close migratory routes', are further evidence of a strategy defined by half-measures and the failure to recognise the humanity and desperation of those attempting the crossing.

The discussion surrounding the deaths of hundreds of innocent people has centred, not only on the desperation of those fleeing wars, hunger and disease, but on how we can best protect our own borders, how we can most effectively deter others from following in the footsteps of those driven to undertake the incredibly dangerous crossing.

It's easy to forget that those dying are men, women and children driven out of countries such as Syria, Iraq, Central African Republic and South Sudan by war, conflict and poverty. We forget that they are often placing themselves in great danger because they feel they have no other choice. We forget that those dying are fellow human beings.

By failing to challenge toxic rhetoric on immigration, we allow our duty to the most vulnerable to be undermined.. We allow the rhetoric of the Establishment which has pinned the failings of the NHS and the housing crisis on an influx of immigrants, to undermine Britain fulfilling its moral duty.

Britain is the sixth wealthiest country in the world. We can afford to fund search-and-rescue missions in the Mediterranean. We can afford to ensure some of the most persecuted people in the world are not left to die in the middle of the sea, their bodies destined for unmarked graves. We can afford to stand up to the old drawbridge mentality and instead carve a new role for the UK on the world stage.

It is time for the UK to take a stand. It is time to recognise the shared responsibility we have. Instead of shirking our duty to ensuring a peaceful, stable world, we must step forward. The UK must pledge adequate funding to help with search-and-rescue missions in the Mediterranean. The UK must take far more than the 143 Syrian refugees resettled here in 2014. The UK must move away from the toxic, damaging and extreme language that now surrounds immigration and remember that it is only by an accident of birth that we do not face the terrifying and difficult decision faced by those who undertake the Mediterranean crossing.]]>Green Manifesto Sets Out Our Vision of a Fairer Societytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.70691442015-04-15T19:00:00-04:002015-06-15T05:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/For the Common Good'. It is shaped by our vision of a future Britain, and our principles and values which say that no one in this, the world's sixth richest economy, should fear not being able to put food on table, or pay the bills that keep a roof over their head.

It is shaped by a politics founded in humanity. We want to create a Britain that cares. But it is also based on a fundamental principle that the other parties deny and ignore: the need for us to build a stable and sustainable society that protects our planet now and for future generations.

This is a new kind of politics. It's an end to the business-as-usual politics that accepts the economy and society being exploited and run for the benefit of the rich few, rather than the many.

It is a vision of an end to the disastrous policy of austerity that is making the poor, the disadvantaged and the young pay for the error and fraud of the bankers.

And it's a vision which is taking hold of an increasing number of Britons. Polls suggest that while in 2010 one in 100 voters choose the Green Party, in this election at least one in 20, and maybe many more, will be voting Green.

And of course this is a unique election for the Green Party - our first as a parliamentary party - following the election of the wonderful Caroline Lucas in Brighton Pavilion in 2010. Voters have seen what just one Green MP can achieve and we're looking to send a strong group of Green MPs to Westminster on May 8. Imagine what they could achieve. Imagine how different politics could look.

That prospect has been hugely boosted by the Green surge, a storm in membership that's seen our numbers far exceed those of Ukip and the Liberal Democrats, and have us standing in nearly 95% of seats in England and Wales.

At the heart of this manifesto is a vision of a fair economy.

That fair economy demands the end of austerity: our plans restore and enhance the essential public services that we all - but particularly the most vulnerable - need, from social care to early childhood education, luncheon clubs and libraries to arts funding and legal aid.

That restoration of our public realm, combined with investment in renewable energy and energy conservation, would create one million good quality stable, well paid jobs. Four hundred thousand of those are in the NHS and social care.

That fair economy is paid for by a rebalancing that sees multinational companies and rich individuals pay their way in taxes, which they are not doing now. That means a crackdown on evasion and avoidance by a restored HMRC, a wealth tax for those worth more than £3 million, and a Robin Hood tax that can also help to contribute to financial stability.

That fair economy demands that every worker is paid a living wage. It's really not a radical statement to say that if you work full time you should earn enough money to live on. Yet we're the only UK party saying that the minimum wage should immediately be lifted to a living wage, with a target minimum wage of £10 an hour by 2020.

And at the heart of this manifesto also is the protection of the NHS, our NHS.

The manifesto sets out our vision of a publicly owned and publicly run NHS, with zero percent of NHS money, our money, going into private profits, and the expensive, destructive market removed from the health service structures.

Privatisation has meant the slashing of the pay and conditions of workers, the cutting of the quality and breadth of services, and the shovelling of public money into private hands. We can't go on like that.

And of course we want to bring the railways back into public hands, to see this essential infrastructure run for the benefit of passengers, not shareholders.

And finally, we must protect our planet.

Many voters have noted how in the first leaders' debate, I was the only speaker to focus on the issue of climate change. None of the others, in two hours, could find space for two words to acknowledge this acute threat facing our world, which demands urgent action.

The exciting plans this manifesto presents would ensure Britain is leading the world in cutting carbon emissions whilst tackling acute social issues like fuel poverty and energy security. It would mean creating quality jobs and opportunities for businesses to thrive and communities to invest in their own futures.

On May 7, voters face a big choice. We have the kind of politics we have now because voters have felt pushed by the electoral system to vote for what they see as the lesser of two evils - two barely separable parties that were jostling for the middle ground.

But the opportunity for real change is in voters' hands - by voting for what they believe in on May 7 they can deliver a peaceful political revolution, and the economic and social transformation towards a Britain that works for the common good set out in this manifesto.]]>This Election Could Change Everythingtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.69754442015-03-31T19:00:00-04:002015-05-31T05:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
This election - more than any other in living history - is throwing up a genuine battle between different visions of how this country should be run.

This time more people will be hearing from the Green Party than ever before - and far more will have a chance to vote Green. Much of the focus will be on the leaders' debates. But the Green Party campaign isn't only exciting because I get the chance to debate with the other party leaders on television. We're going to win record numbers of votes because we'll be knocking on more doors, in more constituencies, than ever before.

It is on those doorsteps that our candidates and supporters will tell people about the principles that are driving us at this election. Firstly, our vision of an economy that delivers for everyone, not just those at the top. That means we will take action on poverty, repealing vicious policies like the bedroom tax and making the minimum wage a Living Wage.

It also means talking, openly and honestly, about tax. We're not afraid to say that we'd tax those with the broadest shoulders more - through a higher income tax, a wealth tax on the top 1% of households and a financial transaction tax on multimillion pound city trading.

An economy that works for the common good is one which sees the yawning gap between rich and poor narrow. It is worth noting that it is not just us saying this is essential - organisations like the IMF and the World Bank are saying that inequality is a threat to economic stability.

Our candidates will also be talking about the hope that we have in the Green Party of taking back our NHS from costly, damaging privatisation - and properly investing in healthcare. Our bold vision for the NHS would see us cancel PFI contracts, end the involvement of private companies in treating patients and bring free prescriptions, chiropody and dentistry to patients in England.

It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that we'll be focussing on the urgent need for real action on climate change. For us that means more than just upping investment in renewables. It means pledging to keep shale gas in the ground by bringing in a country-wide ban on fracking. And it means investing in the largest home insulation scheme this country has ever seen, cutting bills and ending the scandal of fuel poverty.

I know what will be in my mind every time I'm knocking on doors or going on the television: that the Britain I love can be better than it is today. We can replace the politics of fear with the politics of hope, and we can rebuild our country and our economy to work for all of us, not just those at the top.]]>Young Voters - If You Want to Make a Difference at This General Election, You Cantag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.66412342015-02-08T19:00:00-05:002015-04-10T05:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
Almost 16million people - 35% of those registered to vote - did not cast a ballot, meaning that more people did not vote than chose the main party of government.

It's indicative of two major threads of UK politics: the power - and increasing disenfranchisement - of the UK's young people.

Our research, as well as that of organisations such as the NUS, shows that student populations in University towns could change the result in 197 UK constituencies at the next General Election. Combined with those 18-34 year-olds outside full-time education, the youth vote should be central to the selection of the next government.

Yet polls suggest that of the 3.3million young people who will be able to vote in a General Election for the first time on 7 May, a third are not yet on the electoral register, and as many as two million have not decided whether to vote.

Everywhere we look, young people can change the country for the better, but feel tempted not to try.

There are reasons for this. Many young people feel abandoned by political parties, who they believe are chasing 'marginal' 'swing' votes or those from older sectors of society.

Students feel abandoned by the Lib Dems, who broke their promise on tuition fees, the Conservatives, who never even made such a promise, and by the Labour Party, who introduced tuition fees in the first place.

They look at their bank balances, and justifiably associate what they see with a political system which offers them nothing.

And inside and outside our universities, young people look at what the future promises - little chance of employment (youth unemployment is at 16.9%, compared to an average of 5.8% across all age groups), plans to prevent people under 25 receiving money to live away from their parents - and are justified in regarding 'business as usual' politics as not for them.

But there is an alternative. The Green Party stands for a very different politics, for a system which benefits us all, young and old alike. And thanks to dedicated, inspired and inspiring young people, hungry to change the system and the country for the better, we are making important breakthroughs.

We are now the third largest political party in England and Wales, thanks in large part to young people engaging with us and our desire to make the UK work for the young people who are so eager to work for it, but are denied the chance by the failed austerity experiment.

As Green Party leader, I speak to young people not only about why they should register to vote, and also about what they might vote for.

And the issues are those affecting us all: unemployment, low wages, too few homes, financial fears.

For those people, the Green Party makes sense. We will create a million 'Green' jobs, in technology, manufacture and power generation from renewable resources. We will revitalise the public sector, making sure those who need services receive them, and in the process creating new jobs.

We will increase the minimum wage to a living wage - £10 per hour by 2020 - meaning working people can build a decent, comfortable life for themselves and their families. In the same period, we will build 500,000 affordable, social rented homes, meaning those who need a place to live will have one they can afford.

And as Leader of the Green Party, I have had the privilege to meet young people who are campaigning on vital issues, such as fracking.

Some of these people, protecting their regions from pernicious, profit-driven, reckless selfishness, have not decided how to vote.

But the Green Party, environmental guardian and champion of economic and social well-being, is the only political opponent of fracking, and the only party to have supported those battling against it from the start.

I am the leader of the Green Party. It is easy for me to say 'vote Green'. I believe you should. But instead of this, I will say two things.

Your vote has power. If you want to make a difference at this General Election, you can.

For those who think the politics of 'business as usual' - high unemployment, low wages, too few homes, no assistance for those starting out on careers or the housing ladder - is OK, then the traditional parties are waiting.

For the rest of us, there's the Green Party.

We look forward to seeing you on 7 May.]]>The Green Party Must Get a Fair Hearing From Ofcom and Broadcasterstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2015:/theblog//3.64362662015-01-08T10:01:00-05:002015-03-10T05:59:01-04:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/draft ruling that has the potential to have a significant impact on the coming general election campaign: it declared Ukip a "major party", while denying the Green Party the same status, basing its argument chiefly on "past electoral performance".

Obviously, as leader of the Green Party, I'm deeply disappointed by this decision, but as a voter and citizen I'm also gravely concerned about the possible impact on British democracy if this stance is maintained in the final guidance.

Ofcom is not only ignoring the views of the 275,000 people who signed the petition calling for the Greens to be included in the broadcasters' proposed leaders' debates, but also the evidence that 79% of the public want to see us in those debates (and 85% of women).

One notable aspect of this morning's draft ruling is that it focuses heavily on "past electoral support". You might almost think that Ofcom wants to freeze British politics in a past age - the age of neo-liberal, Thatcherite ideals.

Now I don't tend towards conspiracy theories, so I don't think there's a 'plot' to do that - but I do think we have people in positions of power who have very fixed ideas about what politics looks and sounds like, think that it's a basically an unchanging wrestle between the traditional big two, with a couple of satellites that squeeze into the gaps without really saying anything different.

These are the same people who I regularly meet who think wanting to bring the railways back into public hands is a radical idea (despite the fact that this policy is backed by a huge majority of the public and would bring such a vast improvement in the experience of our rail passengers), who also think similarly about making the minimum wage a living wage, even though this would help ensure that millions more people are paid a wage they can build a life around. By dismissing these ideas, they're dismissing the possibility that we can make real improvements to our economy and society and build a better future for Britain.

When you put together the support for the Green Parties of England and Wales, and Scotland, and Northern Ireland, with those for the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru, there's very strong backing for an anti-austerity alternative to the Coalition-Labour approach, as Nicola Sturgeon, Leanne Wood and I pointed out last month.

But Ofcom's ruling risks excluding this alternative voice.

Younger voters in particular could be hit by Ofcom's judgement. A Youth Insight poll last month put the Green Party as the second choice among students, the first time any party beyond the Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems had been in this poll's top three. YouGov puts support among under-25s at 19%. The youth-focused Leader's Live events, in which Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg, Nigel Farage and I have taken part saw the Green Party policies clearly winning the strongest support.

The engagement of young people in the political process is vital for the legitimacy of this election and the future of our democracy. Young voters have every right to have their views represented and explored in the mainstream media.

At many events I attend, from Occupy protests to meetings on university campuses and sixth form colleges, young people say to me that they feel utterly let down by our current democratic process, by media coverage that fails to represent their views or even explore the issues affecting them, and by the first-past-the-post electoral system which heavily distorts support for the "established" parties.

We need to include them, not leave them thinking that democracy isn't meant for them. In fact, we need to include everyone and make sure major strands of political thinking are given an airing at this election - particularly as millions continue to suffer as a result of the government's economic agenda and cuts. The Green Party must get a fair hearing from Ofcom and the broadcasters.]]>The Wrong Spending, for the Wrong Reasonstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2014:/theblog//3.62621702014-12-03T11:21:51-05:002015-02-02T05:59:01-05:00Natalie Bennetthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-bennett/
Take the deficit. Back in 2010 he said he would eliminate the structural deficit by 2015. Today he admits that there is no prospect of this and blames the kinds of global factors his 2010 self said were nothing to do with the size of the deficit in the first place.

Take spending. Back in 2010 he railed against "wasteful spending". Now he wants to increase it by frittering away £15billion of public money on building more roads - creating more traffic and pollution and locking Britain into a reliance on outdated, carbon-intensive technology for years to come.

Of all the possible 'pre-election giveaways' this is probably the most short-sighted and destructive thing the Chancellor could have announced.

He could have been implementing the Energy Bill Revolution, or something like it, to deliver warm, comfortable, affordable-to-heat homes for Britain, lifting nine out of 10 households out of fuel poverty, creating up to 200,000 jobs and cutting carbon emissions. But instead it is now clear this government will complete its term in office with no effective programmes to deal with the poor quality of our housing stock and the resultant poverty, misery, and NHS costs.

Today he froze fuel duty again and cut air passenger duty - two taxes that help to keep greenhouse gas emissions in check. And acts that will help the wealthier at the expense of poorer; poorer households are far less likely to have access to a car, and less likely to fly.

Surely no one sitting around the Cabinet table now really believes that this is "the greenest government ever". The Coalition has managed to exacerbate the environmental crisis rather than ameliorate it, and left Britain trailing way behind on renewable energy when the rest of the world is powering ahead.

But it could all have been so different.

The new Government had an unprecedented opportunity in 2010 - to remake an economy suffering from the effects of the financial crisis. It could have, as it initially talked about, rebalanced the economy towards manufacturing (and I'd add food production), reined in our fraud-ridden, out-of-control banking sector, and launched an effective crackdown on the corporate tax dodging that costs the country between £34billion (official HMRC figures) and £119billion (independent expert figures) a year.

Osborne's promises today on multinational tax-dodging are too little too late - and we'll have to look very carefully at the fine print to see how effective they are likely to be.

Instead, Osborne and his friends have locked millions of workers into poorly paid jobs offering little protection or forced, reluctant self-employment, sought to bolster rather than bury the fossil fuels industry, and increased the gap between the rich and the poor to Victorian levels. He's made the disabled, the ill, the disadvantaged and the young pay for the errors and fraud of the bankers for which they bear no responsibility at all.

The 'official opposition' appears to offer very little opposition to any of this at all - quietly accepting the Coalition's cuts to public spending and hoping a bit of tinkering around the edges will be enough to convince the public to return them to office.

Yet, the public seem less convinced by the failed politics and failed economics of the past than ever. What people do want to see is a credible alternative to austerity that holds out hope for the future and removes fear and insecurity from people's lives.

The Green Party offers real change, rather than clinging to a clearly unstable, unsustainable status quo. We believe social justice and environmental sustainability go hand in hand and that we can only build a more equal society by creating a green economy in which everyone has access to the resources for a decent quality of life.

We need that alternative. As opinion polls show clearly, the British people don't believe in George Osborne's 'long-term economic plan'. And nor, it seems, does he.]]>